20th Century Communist China
In the western world, the relationship between church and state exists as separate entities. Individuals have the freedom to practice or not practice any religion without the government becoming involved. China, too, allows for this freedom of religious belief. However, most governments in the western world use a democratic form of government whereas China uses a communist form of ruling. Therefore, although the freedom of religious belief does exist, a strong interdependence between the state and religion still remains and in the end, the government possesses absolute authority. Buddhism remains China’s most prevalent religion with over 102 million followers (Gnanarama 1998, 4). Because of the strong tie between government and religion, the
…show more content…
political structure continues to influence the clergy who interprets the Buddha’s teachings for the laity. These individuals, known as the samgha, consist of a Fourfold Community of monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen. During the 20th century in China, the samgha, through interpreting and teaching Buddha’s Dharma, served as a tangible form of The Three Jewels of Buddhism that the laity can directly access; however, this samgha and its role remained heavily influenced and interfered with politics and corruption which allowed the Communist government to use Buddhism as a means of control over its constituents.
In an ideal world, the Samgha exists simply to interpret the scriptures and teachings of the Buddha and to teach those scriptures to others. One cannot attain awakening alone without support from the surrounding community and the clergy who understand Buddha’s Dharma. The life of asceticism and constant devotion and dedication should serve as an example for the laity and reflect the ideals of the Buddha. When the Buddha established the samgha, he sought to bind the samgha together by a common bond of brotherhood irrespective of its members’ former social positions and to integrate them into one unitary organization cherishing collective consciousness of helping each other for each other’s welfare. (Gnanarama 1998, 50)
The Buddha wanted the samgha to have a self-identity. Those who are in the samgha should not differentiate among themselves due to previous social statuses in society. Not only does this ensure that all members of the samgha are equal, but it also promotes unity among the samgha. While pursuing a life of asceticism, social positions in society should not matter for the samgha. Their main role above all else should serve to promote Buddhism to others.
Promoting Buddhism and teaching it to the laity allows the samgha to ensure that they will continue to receive basic necessities such as food, clothing, lodging, and medicine that only the laity can provide. Therefore, in an ideal world, the life of the Buddhist samgha represents simplicity, and the monks and nuns take only what the laity gives them. The samgha simply offer their blessings to the laity and act as a “field of merit” in return for the gifts of the laity (Gethin 1998, 87). The clergy represents the closest connection that the laity has to the Buddha himself so giving to it increases good karma so that one can ultimately achieve a higher rebirth.
This relationship between the samgha and the laity should be two-sided and should not be influenced through outside external factors such as politics, corruption, or finances.
However, most countries and societies in the world remain heavily influenced through political control and corruption. Inevitably, all these factors begin to influence religion and religion’s primary goal in society for the laity in contrast to those with authority. Because China uses a communist form of government, this interdependence between politics and religion continues to prevail since ancient times. Even rulers in dynastic China used Buddhism as a way to win loyalty among their people. For example, the reason the rulers of the northern and southern dynasties (265-587) promoted Buddhism was that they felt that certain Buddhist doctrines (e.g., endurance of suffering by the Boddhisatvas, promise of future life in Western Paradise) were useful ideological devices to draw the oppressed people away from immediate concern with their misfortunes. (Yu 1971, 54)
China has had a continuous past history of authoritative involvement since dynastic China in religious affairs as a means to control the people that also remain prevalent during 20th century communist China.
Government uses religion as a solution to problems that they themselves cannot fix. Religion provides a temporary antidote to inescapable problems so that they do not have to be explained. Government and the rulers start using religion in a negative way to promote unity among their constituents. The constituents, who are followers of Buddhism, may then place more trust in the government because the government’s ideologies align with the constituents’ ideologies as well but they do not realize that their immediate problems and concerns are not getting …show more content…
fixed.
This continuous cycle and relationship creates a catch-22 situation that becomes impossible to escape. The Chinese laity may think that the government provides them with “progress, social justice, human welfare, and freedom,” but government uses religion so that they don’t have to focus too heavily on these issues in the first place (Puhakka and Puligandla 1970, 351). In the event of a drought, famine, or any catastrophic event, for example, the government can use Buddhism and the notion of suffering in order to suppress the severity of the problem. In a Communist society where progress already remains stifled, such notions “signalize stupor, stagnation, and the peak of blindness” among the people (Puhakka and Puligandla 1970, 351). If religion becomes involved, then the constituents will not question the authority. Once again the use of religion in a negative way in society shows why the Chinese government provides freedom of religion in the first place: it helps them get involved and ultimately gives them more power/authority.
In each of the cases, Buddhism as a religion and its followers must adapt to the political structure. As a unit, they must work with the political structure so that Buddhism can co-exist and continue with politics. Moreover, the Chinese Communist government strongly believes that religion is an erroneous worldview produced by the believer in response to the impact of certain external forces (natural and/or social). When these forces are removed through revolutions, education, and science, then the cause of religion will also be eliminated; but as long as religion still exists, the party believes that it should be allowed to stay. (Yu 1971, 49)
The government does not view religion as essential for political order. The Communist regime view it as a temporary “worldview” that will soon be eliminated due to more important factors such as education, science, or revolutions in society. The belief among the communist Chinese government that religion is temporary influences the way the government interacts with its people; for the Chinese government, the people’s opinion and views do not matter because ultimately the regime holds ultimate authority. However, because Buddhism already remains so prevalent in China, the government simply allows followers to practice it without explicitly interfering. Allowing this freedom of religion ensures that the Chinese government can then use this freedom as a way to establish control over the people. Since the government allows such an important freedom, the people view the government as beneficiary and are more likely to follow the government’s ideas, rules, and regulations.
Politics interfere with the purity and simplicity of the religion through constant government involvement and influence over religious authority and the laity.
Therefore, a group of religious authority must exist to help deal with the problems of the government and strike and mediate the role of politics and how many compromises can be made. On the surface, the samgha provides such religious authority. In the eyes of the people, the samgha voices the concerns of the people and ensure that China’s communist regime does not use religion inappropriately as a blanket to cover up problems and concerns of the people. The samgha ensures that Buddhism and the Dharma’s interpretations are correct. Moreover, the samgha also possess authority to adapt Buddhist scriptures and law to fit societal expectations. Therefore, it seems that a balance of power exists. Before the samgha makes any changes, the laity should be notified so that the laity can voice their opinions and the samgha can still maintain their
credibility.
However, deeper analysis of the Chinese samgha reveals a flaw in the apparent purity and simplicity. In China, the visible strength of the present Sangha lies in the more than 100 large and historically important monasteries, which have been restored with government funds by the Chinese Buddhist Association. (Yu 1971, 54)
Initially, this may not seem as such a big of an issue. On the surface, the monasteries and the Chinese Buddhist Association serve as a unifying factor for the samgha. Even the Buddha sought to “integrate them into one unitary organization cherishing collective consciousness” (Gnanarama 1998, 50). The Chinese Buddhist Association seems to do just that; after all, it provides the samgha with a community and resources so that they can efficiently teach Buddha’s Dharma, scriptures, and teachings to the laity to guide them through the process of awakening. It assists the “government to carry out the policy of religious freedom to promote Buddhist culture and education” (Yu 1971, 56). Therefore, the laity will believe that the Chinese Buddhist Association serves as an intermediary to help protect their freedoms from the communist government and promote Buddhism.
political structure continues to influence the clergy who interprets the Buddha’s teachings for the laity. These individuals, known as the samgha, consist of a Fourfold Community of monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen. During the 20th century in China, the samgha, through interpreting and teaching Buddha’s Dharma, served as a tangible form of The Three Jewels of Buddhism that the laity can directly access; however, this samgha and its role remained heavily influenced and interfered with politics and corruption which allowed the Communist government to use Buddhism as a means of control over its constituents.
In an ideal world, the Samgha exists simply to interpret the scriptures and teachings of the Buddha and to teach those scriptures to others. One cannot attain awakening alone without support from the surrounding community and the clergy who understand Buddha’s Dharma. The life of asceticism and constant devotion and dedication should serve as an example for the laity and reflect the ideals of the Buddha. When the Buddha established the samgha, he sought to bind the samgha together by a common bond of brotherhood irrespective of its members’ former social positions and to integrate them into one unitary organization cherishing collective consciousness of helping each other for each other’s welfare. (Gnanarama 1998, 50)
The Buddha wanted the samgha to have a self-identity. Those who are in the samgha should not differentiate among themselves due to previous social statuses in society. Not only does this ensure that all members of the samgha are equal, but it also promotes unity among the samgha. While pursuing a life of asceticism, social positions in society should not matter for the samgha. Their main role above all else should serve to promote Buddhism to others.
Promoting Buddhism and teaching it to the laity allows the samgha to ensure that they will continue to receive basic necessities such as food, clothing, lodging, and medicine that only the laity can provide. Therefore, in an ideal world, the life of the Buddhist samgha represents simplicity, and the monks and nuns take only what the laity gives them. The samgha simply offer their blessings to the laity and act as a “field of merit” in return for the gifts of the laity (Gethin 1998, 87). The clergy represents the closest connection that the laity has to the Buddha himself so giving to it increases good karma so that one can ultimately achieve a higher rebirth.
This relationship between the samgha and the laity should be two-sided and should not be influenced through outside external factors such as politics, corruption, or finances.
However, most countries and societies in the world remain heavily influenced through political control and corruption. Inevitably, all these factors begin to influence religion and religion’s primary goal in society for the laity in contrast to those with authority. Because China uses a communist form of government, this interdependence between politics and religion continues to prevail since ancient times. Even rulers in dynastic China used Buddhism as a way to win loyalty among their people. For example, the reason the rulers of the northern and southern dynasties (265-587) promoted Buddhism was that they felt that certain Buddhist doctrines (e.g., endurance of suffering by the Boddhisatvas, promise of future life in Western Paradise) were useful ideological devices to draw the oppressed people away from immediate concern with their misfortunes. (Yu 1971, 54)
China has had a continuous past history of authoritative involvement since dynastic China in religious affairs as a means to control the people that also remain prevalent during 20th century communist China.
Government uses religion as a solution to problems that they themselves cannot fix. Religion provides a temporary antidote to inescapable problems so that they do not have to be explained. Government and the rulers start using religion in a negative way to promote unity among their constituents. The constituents, who are followers of Buddhism, may then place more trust in the government because the government’s ideologies align with the constituents’ ideologies as well but they do not realize that their immediate problems and concerns are not getting …show more content…
fixed.
This continuous cycle and relationship creates a catch-22 situation that becomes impossible to escape. The Chinese laity may think that the government provides them with “progress, social justice, human welfare, and freedom,” but government uses religion so that they don’t have to focus too heavily on these issues in the first place (Puhakka and Puligandla 1970, 351). In the event of a drought, famine, or any catastrophic event, for example, the government can use Buddhism and the notion of suffering in order to suppress the severity of the problem. In a Communist society where progress already remains stifled, such notions “signalize stupor, stagnation, and the peak of blindness” among the people (Puhakka and Puligandla 1970, 351). If religion becomes involved, then the constituents will not question the authority. Once again the use of religion in a negative way in society shows why the Chinese government provides freedom of religion in the first place: it helps them get involved and ultimately gives them more power/authority.
In each of the cases, Buddhism as a religion and its followers must adapt to the political structure. As a unit, they must work with the political structure so that Buddhism can co-exist and continue with politics. Moreover, the Chinese Communist government strongly believes that religion is an erroneous worldview produced by the believer in response to the impact of certain external forces (natural and/or social). When these forces are removed through revolutions, education, and science, then the cause of religion will also be eliminated; but as long as religion still exists, the party believes that it should be allowed to stay. (Yu 1971, 49)
The government does not view religion as essential for political order. The Communist regime view it as a temporary “worldview” that will soon be eliminated due to more important factors such as education, science, or revolutions in society. The belief among the communist Chinese government that religion is temporary influences the way the government interacts with its people; for the Chinese government, the people’s opinion and views do not matter because ultimately the regime holds ultimate authority. However, because Buddhism already remains so prevalent in China, the government simply allows followers to practice it without explicitly interfering. Allowing this freedom of religion ensures that the Chinese government can then use this freedom as a way to establish control over the people. Since the government allows such an important freedom, the people view the government as beneficiary and are more likely to follow the government’s ideas, rules, and regulations.
Politics interfere with the purity and simplicity of the religion through constant government involvement and influence over religious authority and the laity.
Therefore, a group of religious authority must exist to help deal with the problems of the government and strike and mediate the role of politics and how many compromises can be made. On the surface, the samgha provides such religious authority. In the eyes of the people, the samgha voices the concerns of the people and ensure that China’s communist regime does not use religion inappropriately as a blanket to cover up problems and concerns of the people. The samgha ensures that Buddhism and the Dharma’s interpretations are correct. Moreover, the samgha also possess authority to adapt Buddhist scriptures and law to fit societal expectations. Therefore, it seems that a balance of power exists. Before the samgha makes any changes, the laity should be notified so that the laity can voice their opinions and the samgha can still maintain their
credibility.
However, deeper analysis of the Chinese samgha reveals a flaw in the apparent purity and simplicity. In China, the visible strength of the present Sangha lies in the more than 100 large and historically important monasteries, which have been restored with government funds by the Chinese Buddhist Association. (Yu 1971, 54)
Initially, this may not seem as such a big of an issue. On the surface, the monasteries and the Chinese Buddhist Association serve as a unifying factor for the samgha. Even the Buddha sought to “integrate them into one unitary organization cherishing collective consciousness” (Gnanarama 1998, 50). The Chinese Buddhist Association seems to do just that; after all, it provides the samgha with a community and resources so that they can efficiently teach Buddha’s Dharma, scriptures, and teachings to the laity to guide them through the process of awakening. It assists the “government to carry out the policy of religious freedom to promote Buddhist culture and education” (Yu 1971, 56). Therefore, the laity will believe that the Chinese Buddhist Association serves as an intermediary to help protect their freedoms from the communist government and promote Buddhism.